The Portillos Restaurant in Violation of Their Workers Constitutional Rights

Douglas Sacha

Portillos. Hot Dogs. Beef. Burgers. Salads. Constitutional Rights Issues. 

Portillos is a well known hot dog restaurant in the Chicago land area that started in Villa Park in 1963 and now has locations spreading throughout the country.

Now Portillos is in hot water with the Illinois State Senate. On November 6, 2023, the Illinois Senate Resolution 584 was introduced and is currently at 25% progress to becoming passed. The resolution is to urge the restaurant company to honor the wishes of the employees that have voted to join a union and bargain collectively for the betterment of their lives. 

The Resolution urges all state officials to stand with Portillos workers in their wishes to form a union to receive better working conditions, better wages, and access to sick time benefits. There is also praise for the workers who made the decision in Addison, Illinois to join the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, AFL-CIO.

Sponsors of the bill include: Sen. Javier Cervantes, Sen. Lakesia Collins, Sen. Mary Edly-Allen, Sen. Robert Peters, Sen. Mike Porfirio and Sen. Ram Villivalam. 

Illinois Senate Resolution 584

On March 10, 2023 the workers at a Portillos Foods Distribution Center in Addison, Illinois filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in order to organize a union. There was a vote for employees held on April 13, 2023 to determine if the union would occur. The vote was 28-20 in favor of forming a union. 

This vote marked the first time that any workers at any Portillo’s facilities, including both restaurants and production venues, have been able to organize. The effort for this victory started back in June 2021 when the workers approached Arise Chicago, a group that specializes in workers rights and helped to encourage workers to unionize. 

At the time that workers went to Arise Chicago, there were complaints that during the pandemic there were low wages, low staffing, and unsafe working conditions. 

The union itself would cover only 49 people and would not include workers that are working at the restaurants, only workers at the Portillos Foods Distribution Center.  These are the people with the jobs to operate the forklift and cleaners. These workers actively work to pack and ship the orders for Portillo’s partners across the country. 

On April 19, 2023, the Portillo's Restaurant Group, Inc. did not honor the votes of their workers to join the union. The resolution states that the company used “stall tactics, including challenging the election conducted by the NLRB by filing an appeal.”

On July 19, 2023, the NLRB ruled against Portillos and with the distribution workers attempting to form a union. Portillos appealed once again on August 2, 2023. 

The food distribution workers have expressed concerns over the actions that the Portillos company has decided to take with the workers' decisions to vote to join a union and believe they are doing everything in their power to deny them the right to bargain collectively. 

The resolution is makes it clear that it is in support of the distribution workers, “resolved, that we commend and acknowledge the decision made by Portillo's food distribution workers in Addison to unionize and join the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, AFL-CIO.” 

Workers’ Rights Amendment of November 2022

The reason that this is a Constitutional rights issue is due to the fact that in November 2022, the Worker’s Rights Amendment was passed that guarantees the right to bargain for workers in Illinois. 

It reads: “Employees shall have the fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of negotiating wages, hours and working conditions, and to protect their economic welfare and safety and work. No law shall be passed that interferes with, negates, or diminishes the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively over their wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment and work place safety, including any law or ordinance that prohibits the execution or application of agreements between employers and labor organizations that represent employees requiring membership in an organization as a condition of employment.”

This was a monumental moment for workers in Illinois. "Illinois holds a rich union history; from the 1887 Haymarket Affair to the 1894 Pullman Strike, Illinois laborers have been at the forefront of fighting for fair wages, reasonable hours, and safe working conditions," Governor JB Pritzker stated in a celebration of the passing of the Amendment. 

In Illinois, the Governor in office must proclaim in an official statement to announce any passage of a constitutional amendment once it has been certified by the State Board of Elections. The Worker’s Rights Amendment was passed with 54.4% of total ballots.

Potential Issues with the Worker’s Rights Amendment 

There are issues of how broad the wording of the Amendment is. It raises the question of certain aspects that are not addressed in detail like who is permitted to negotiate with an Illinois employer, when bargaining is permitted, and to what extent it is permitted. 

The amendment addresses that workers have the right “to protect their economic welfare and safety at work” but those in opposition wonder what the definition of “economic welfare” is in context of the amendment. 

There is also concern for those who do not believe in how the amendment is worded since it states, “through representatives of their own choosing,” which would mean that workers can negotiate their own wishes instead of just through a union representative. There is no clarification on what “their own choosing” means or any requirements that the representatives must have to be able to negotiate for the workers. 

Portillo’s Company Statement 

Portillo’s Code of Business Ethics states that workers at Portillos are a family “As a family, we work together to make everyone feel at home by treating others with respect. We step up when someone needs help, or, as we say, ‘we’ve got you.’ But we also function best when we have individual accountability and integrity.

This Code of Business Ethics seems to not correspond with how they are denying or stalling the allowance of their employees to form a union.  

The company released a statement in which they expressed that the stall tactics are what is best for their employees and they are still working in the best interests of their employees as they have always done. 

“Union representatives made false promises to team members to secure a winning majority ... While we are diappointed with the outcome of this preliminary rulling, we will continue to evaluate our options to set aside the result of the April 13 election." 

“The improper activity noted in the filings includes promises by union representatives to team members that in exchange for voting yes, the union would provide them a pathway to citizenship, including by providing them with green cards,” they also stated. 

Quotes from the Workers 

“The only one that Portillo's is looking out for is themselves... and their pockets. We are sick of their greediness and are here to send Portillo's a strong message that while they may want to ostracize us within the walls of our factory, we are not alone in our fight- we have our community behind us and we will continue to fight until we win," Brenda Bedolla, Organizer with the Iron Workers Union stated in an interview. 

There is a demand from workers to have a contract guaranteeing better wages, better benefits, more vacation time, paid sick days, says Fernando Jimenez who is a forklift driver at the facility.  

Jiminez that Portillos is promoting an anti-union campaign but they have not expressed they will be firing workers at this point. 

Previous Lawsuits and Issues from Portillos 

This is not the first time Portillos’ potential questionable employee treatment has been brought up publically. 

On July 24, 2023 a case Donald v. Portillo's Hot Dogs, Inc. was heard with LaTonya Donald as the plaintiff against Portillo's company.

LaTonya Donald was employed at Portillos from February 2002 until September 2010 starting as a Guest Service employee, then Crew Chief in 2004, and in 2006 promoted on a part time basis to be Banquet Manager. Portillo’s claims she was never formally promoted to Banquet Manager in 2006 but instead was asked to assist with banquets occasionally. 

In April 2006, Portillo stated that she did not need to assist with banquets anymore, this occurring at the same time that her then-manager was engaging in racially discriminatory behavior. The behavior included curing or reducing the overtime Donald received. 

In July 2006, Donald was moved to another location due to this behavior in which she claims it was not voluntary and the Portillo’s states that it was. In August 2006, Donald filed a discrimination charge with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission due to demotion of position, the racial discriminatory behavior, and the relocation. After this charge, Donalds stated that Portillo retaliated against her in various forms. 

There were multiple instances in which Donalds was relocated and she had three charges of discrimination total against Portillo's company. It was not until September 24, 2010 that her employment ended because she was late to work due to a family emergency. Her supervisors stated that it was her final attendance violation. Portillo’s states this is not what happened and she was told she could take the day off for the family emergency. 

Another time that Portillo’s had a lawsuit with an employee was a sexual discrimination case, Heatherly v. Portillo's Hot Dogs, Inc. 

Cynthia Heatherly was a guest services employee from January 2009 to June 2010. In September 2009, Healtherly found out that she was pregnant and in January 2010 she presented a doctor's note to her Assistant Manager in order to show she could only perform light duties and not work over 8 hours in a day. 

In February 2010, there were complications with her pregnancy and she was advised to take a leave from her till she gave birth. When she gave birth in May 2010, she called to discuss coming back to work and timing. The Assistant to Portillo’s Benefits Manager had explained that her 12 weeks of Family and Medical Leave had expired but she would be able to do 3 more weeks with Portillo’s policy. She would have to return in early June for work. 

The day that Healtherly was told that she needed to come to work, she did not and did not communicate with Portillo’s. Five days after the date, Healtherly was sent a letter informing her that her employment had been terminated but she could be rehired and return to work once her doctors cleared her for work. She never contacted Portillo’s again and in October 2010 filed a discrimination charge with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Another time of potential questionable workplace behavior was because of potential religious discrimination. Earnell Brown, a line cook for Portillo’s explained that he could not work on Sundays due to religious reasons. At one point, there was an incident in which his supervisor stated, “For a Christian, you sure have an attitude.” Brown was fired after multiple days of being sent home early for no particular reason. He said there was an instance in which his supervisor physically threatened him and he was fired in retaliation. 

Brown was seeking re-employment from Portillo’s as well as pay from the 11 months that he was fired.